Penetration Testing mailing list archives

Re: Risk metrics


From: v b <r0cketgrl () yahoo com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 11:48:00 -0800 (PST)

All --

Asset valuation has always been a speed bump in the
security management life cycle.  Many of the
organizations for whom I have performed assessments
haven't a clue about the value and criticality that
their systems and information assets have in regard to
their business.  Thus, for many businesses, it is
close to impossible to quantify the ALE for any
vulnerability/risk model.  So the industry has swung
more toward qualifiable risk models.

It is possible to use a hybrid model for some
organizations, if they have some historical data to
feed into the algorithms one uses. But this is not
likely, thus, the whole point of using qualifiable
models over quantifiable is that it is easier.
Qualifiable algorithms are subjective, whereas
quantifiable are more objective.  But if you don't
have the appropriate data, then I agree with Pete. You
don't have a realistic view of the organization's
security posture.  As for pen-tests, it is true that
it's nearly impossible to quantify ALE, as there are
too many variables in the vulnerability/impact
scenarios. 

I have seen several white papers and discussions
regarding the use of a hybrid model to demonstrate a
more objective snapshot of a company's risk posture. 
Does anyone out there have any links to additional
discussions on the topic of hybrid risk analysis
models? 

Regards

Valerie

--- Pete Herzog <lists () isecom org> wrote:

Rafael,

Part of the problem is, as everyone else is telling
you too, that
traditional risk metrics in pen-tests cannot be
true.

We have updated this in OSSTMM 3.0.  If you look at
the RAV Spreadsheet
in http://www.isecom.org/securitymetrics.shtml
you'll see the changes.
The OSSTMM has pulled out of RISK completely because
it is so biased
(which is why it regarded qualitative methods for
engaging risks in the
past).

New metrics are quantification-based-- facts only
from operations used
to discern a score that stands as a foundation for
any risk assessments
one plans to do as it is itself only an indicator of
current operations.

While the amount of publicly available info on
osstmm 3.0 and
accompanying RAVs is sparse, the spreadsheet does go
into good detail
and many companies are already applying this model
successfully.  It
allows them to compare security in operations
between companies,
industries, even departments and vectors within the
same organization.
The RAVs are flexible and therefore allow then all
vectors to be summed
together to provide a total for the whole
organization.

Sincerely,
-pete.


Michael Gargiullo wrote:
I agree with Marc completely.

Only the company can give you those numbers. It's
management's job to
determine what their assets are, and costs
involved if they loose those
assets.

You, as the Pen Tester, cannot determine what the
value of a certain
machine or service is to the company.

You can however, tell them what the low hanging
fruit is, and take a
best guess as to what their "Crown Jewels" are. 
So you'd go for the SQL
server, and the Active Directory, and the Radius
Server, etc...

As for explaining difficulty, if you have in depth
knowledge of how the
vulnerability works, and if an exploit is in the
wild (proof of concepts
count), you can state explicitly "At this moment
in time, this is
difficult to exploit, but that could change
tomorrow".  Remember,
Vulnerability scans and pen tests are a snapshot
(A moment in time).
Networks change, some change yearly, some change
monthly, and some
networks change hourly.

-Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Heuse [mailto:Marc.Heuse () nruns com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 3:22 AM
To: 'RSMC'; pen-test () securityfocus com
Subject: RE: Risk metrics

Hi,

if there would be standard metrics, they would
have been in the guide
:-)

to be serious: in risk management there are
standard metrics.
the most used one is to determine Likelyhood and
Impact of a risk.
These are then described as low/medium/high (or
very low, low, medium,
high,
criticak; or ... well you get the picture). Or you
put values in there,
e.g. liklyhood that it happens once a year is 20%,
impact would be 
$10k. This is then called Expected Anual Loss, or
Anual Loss Expectancy.
And then there is CRAMM (british standard) which
uses values from 1-10
for these.

Basically it is very hard to use likelyhood and
impact in a pentest
report.
Who can convince everyone that the liklyhood of
exploition of a weak
password
is xx%? It just doesnt work. Then the impact - if
you are not working
within
the company for whom you are performing the
pentest, it is very, very
hard
to have an idea of the costs.

So for pentesting - especially when providing
pentest services - other
metrics are needed. But there are no standards for
that.
From my philosophy and experience there are just a
few metrics helpful:
criticality of a vulnerability (metric like 1:
unharmful information
gathering to 10: remote control of a complete
network/infrastructure),
and level of exposure (e.g. 1: controlled keyboard
access only,
10: Internet connection without filtering).
Some customers also want to know the difficulty
level to exploit or
knowledge level required by the attacker (e.g. 1:
needs to be able
to move a mouse, 10: strong reverse engineering,
assembler coding,
machine level knowledge on several platforms etc.
required). But this
is a trap - if there is a tool or exploit which
you dont know, or is
released some days/weeks later, the difficulty
drops - but nobody will
update a table in a report in return.

Cheers,
Marc



====================================================================
Marc Heuse
n.runs GmbH
Mobile Phone: +49-160-98925941
Key fingerprint = AE3F CDC0 8C7B 8797 BEAC  4BF8
EC8F E64B 0A84 EA10


====================================================================
 
-----Original Message-----
From: RSMC [mailto:smcsoc () yahoo es] 
Sent: Montag, 31. Oktober 2005 14:57
To: pen-test () securityfocus com
Subject: Risk metrics

Hi,

As OSSTMM states, "Reports must use only
qualitative
metrics for gauging risks based on industry
accepted
methods".
What metrics are more suitable to use in
pen-testing
services?

Thanks in advance,

Rafael San Miguel Carrasco



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Audit your website security with Acunetix Web
Vulnerability Scanner: 

Hackers are concentrating their efforts on attacking
applications on your 
website. Up to 75% of cyber attacks are launched on
shopping carts, forms, 
login pages, dynamic content etc. Firewalls, SSL and
locked-down servers are 
futile against web application hacking. Check your
website for vulnerabilities 
to SQL injection, Cross site scripting and other web
attacks before hackers do! 
Download Trial at:

http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/pen-test_050831

=== message truncated ===




                
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Audit your website security with Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner: 

Hackers are concentrating their efforts on attacking applications on your 
website. Up to 75% of cyber attacks are launched on shopping carts, forms, 
login pages, dynamic content etc. Firewalls, SSL and locked-down servers are 
futile against web application hacking. Check your website for vulnerabilities 
to SQL injection, Cross site scripting and other web attacks before hackers do! 
Download Trial at:

http://www.securityfocus.com/sponsor/pen-test_050831
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Current thread: